I made the mistake of taking a look at the Olympus EPL-1 and I really took an initial liking to it. I know the sensor on the EPL-1 is much larger than the S90 and the cameras are in different categories, but if I were to consider an EPL-1 down the road I would probably consider it as a replacement for my S90.

With the 14-42 lens (which I think starts at f/4) that comes with the EPL-1, how would the low light capability compare to the S90? Would it be better at high ISO because of the larger sensor even though the S90 has the f/2 lens? Or would I need to buy a faster lens to see any real difference? What about day time shots (assuming the same lens)? Would there likely be a big difference in dynamic range between the EPL-1 and the S90 or other clearly noticeable difference in IQ?

Of course the EPL-1 would provide a better ability for limited depth of field if I am interested in that, plus the benefit of flexibility afforded by different lens choices, but the S90 has some benefits too. I'm just trying to get a sense of what the practical immediate benefit of purchasing an EPL-1 I might expect to see if I decided to purchase one at some point in the future, assuming I didn't initially lay out any additional money for an EVF or other lenses.

Thanks, Sarah. Yes, clearly the EPL1 is more flexible and clearly a "next level" camera.

I guess I was trying to get a little more of a sense of what the larger sensor and better glass will equate to in practical terms in typical day to day shooting (again assuming using only the kit lens). For example, in decent lighting conditions, would there be a discernible image quality difference, or what I really need to blow up the picture to notice anything. I assuming it would be better in low light, but again, I'm wondering how big of a difference there would be if you consider the EPL1 larger sensor with kit lens vs. the smaller sensor of the S90 with the f/2 lens. Clearly, there would be a very large difference if comparing the S90 to the EPL1 with the 20mm f/1.7 lens!